The Problem With The Test

Sep 30, 2015, by Dawn Gibson

Special education has been a driving force, for most of my life. Maybe I should say, helping and encouraging individuals with special needs, and their families has been my driving force. It is what I do, and contributes to who I am as a person. As a veteran teacher, I have been privy to working with students and their families from all walks of life, each facing their own challenges. I have witnessed stories of great personal triumph, along with heartbreaking tragedy. Throughout my years of teaching (and now consulting) I have taught, tested, reinforced and remediated. I've tried the latest techniques and engaged in heated debate. I've written IEP's, completed documentation and sat on both sides of the conference table. Some days I was on top of the world with my students...and to be honest, some days I felt defeated. Life is like that for all of us, yes?

As I read this article yesterday, I could feel myself tensing. I agree with what the writer of the article said, it is the reason behind the article that left me feeling irritated. Testing. A word that most teachers don't really enjoy. Testing is not the reason, nor the heart's passion, as to why teachers chose to go into the teaching profession in the first place. I know I can only speak for myself, but I can vehemently state, "testing" certainly was not the reason I chose to live the life of a special education teacher.

You should read the article for yourself, but here is the gist, quoting a couple of sections of Laurie Levy's article. "Secretary of Education, Arne Duncan thinks our schools are shortchanging students with special needs or disabilities. The truth is, he's right--- he's just not right about how our schools are failing them." She went on to say, "But my years of experience in education tell me that putting more resources into teacher training to provide specialized and differentiated instruction would be of far more benefit to kids with special needs than expecting them to master grade-level material and pass standardized tests. And the services and supports that help these children learn---classroom aides, speech therapists, social workers, occupational and physical therapists and the newest technologies and methods of instruction---these are the things that should be added. Instead, we spend our time and money on testing and cut these vital services and supports."

That, I believe, is the frustration of so many teachers (both special and general ed). A dear retired teacher, friend of mine, posted a meme the other day that follows this train of thought about testing. "When you sit in front of a kindergartner with a stopwatch in your hand, and she can't bark out the letters fast enough to earn the score of proficient, and you're recording all of it, you aren't teaching her to read, you're teaching her to hate reading." --Phillip Kovacs, Assoc. Prof. of Educ.

In years gone by, many special education students were allowed to be exempted from taking the standardized tests each Spring. That is no longer the case, only the most severe and involved students are exempted now (1%). This bothers me, and let me tell you why. I agree that we, as educators and school districts, should have high expectations for our students that are receiving special services. There does need to be a standard to strive for, no argument from me there, but let me give you some examples about special ed and testing. As a special educator, if I get a child in my classroom that is in fifth grade, but is only reading at a first grade level, we run into trouble with testing. The standardized tests are given on a child's grade level, not their instructional level. If I, as the teacher, work diligently that year with that student on reading, and he/she makes a years progress (and an entire years progress would be amazing!) he/she is still only reading at a second grade level (maybe beginning third). If that child is forced to take a fifth grade test, in my opinion, it is setting him/her up for failure. The student made such good progress, he/she learned so many new words, but will probably bomb the test(s) because he/she is unable to identify enough fifth grade vocabulary words to understand, what is required reading. A standardized test at the child's actual grade level is never going to show accurate progress. It will only be frustrating.

Another student I worked with, is in high school. She is non-verbal, in a wheelchair, and has the cognitive abilities of a toddler. Her mother and I have discussed the ridiculousness of her being required to take a standardized test, even if it is an alternative assessment. This young lady, does not understand algebraic variables, plotting on a graph, or how to add negative numbers. What is testing her in these things going to prove? You can't teach a child out of a disability. It is not going to happen. The tests results are certainly not going to be accurate, or relevant information for this student or her parents. Surely, I am not the only one that thinks this kind of testing for a special needs child, is insane? Have the people in the government, that make up these rules, ever taught a child with learning differences?

Should we have high standards for those children with special needs? Of course we should! We should for all students. A child should be assisted in meeting their full potential, whatever that may be for him/her. That should be the standard for which we strive.